Oakland’s Measure OO, designed to strengthen and update the city’s Public Ethics Commission, was ahead with about 72 percent of the vote based on early returns from the Alameda County Registrar of Voters Office on Tuesday night.
Measure OO, which requires a majority vote to pass, was leading after a little more than 37,600 votes out of the city’s 252,382 registered voters had been counted by about 8:20 p.m.
“It always feels good to sponsor a ballot measure or to jointly sponsor it with the Ethics Commission, and see it pass overwhelmingly, in this case,” said Councilmember Dan Kalb.
He noted that the city’s other two measures, NN and MM, public safety parcel taxes to help pay for police and fire services, were also passing.
“I think that’s a good thing for several different reasons. I’m glad it’s happening. I’m still biting my nails on the national scene right now,” Kalb said, referring to the presidential election results.
If the results hold, it would change the qualifications for PEC commissioners, tighten rules governing lobbyist gifts to elected officials, add one more investigator to the commission’s staff — for a total of two — and authorize the PEC executive director to hire outside lawyers on issues where the city attorney has a conflict of interest, among other things.
It would also require the City Council to consider within 180 days PEC proposals to amend laws the commission enforces or administers so that future ethics reforms can’t be killed behind closed doors.
Following a circuitous path
The measure had a somewhat circuitous path to the ballot.
The commission brought a package of suggested reforms to the council back in the spring, but at the time there just wasn’t consensus among councilmembers on some of the proposed changes.
Kalb said he then worked with PEC staff, the city attorney’s office and other councilmembers to see if they could pair down the original proposal to something a majority on the council could support.
The first time the council heard the proposed measure was during an informational presentation where it became clear there weren’t the votes for putting it on the ballot, mostly over concerns that it would give the PEC authority to set the mayor’s salary and over worries about its cost, both to put it on the ballot — estimated at up to $600,000 — and to hire the additional investigator, an ongoing annual cost of about $330,000.
“This is hard for me, this is really, really hard for me but I also understand the challenges that are facing us in the upcoming budget cycles.” Councilmember Carroll Fife
Kalb and the PEC agreed to remove the mayoral salary from the proposal but when it came back to the council, it lost on a 5-3 vote.
“This is hard for me, this is really, really hard for me but I also understand the challenges that are facing us in the upcoming budget cycles,” Councilmember Carroll Fife said at the time before voting “no,” referring to the city’s effort to close an estimated $177 million budget deficit.
Ultimately, Fife brought it back to the council for reconsideration after being contacted by several constituents and former city staffers and, at its third hearing, the proposal to place Measure OO on the ballot passed with a 5-2 vote, with councilmembers Kevin Jenkins and Noel Gallo opposed and Treva Reid excused.
“I was really torn about this particular item and I’m also very aware of the current political moment that we’re in and the need for additional accountability, and I believe the PEC can offer us that support,” Fife said.
What Measure OO would do
Measure OO would amend the city’s charter to:
• Prohibit people from serving on the PEC if within the past two years they were an elected local official or candidate or employee of that official or candidate, the spouse or close family member of a local elected official, an officer of a political party, a registered lobbyist or a campaign donor who gave more than two times the local contribution limit, currently $600.
• Prohibit PEC commissioners from being employees of local elected officials, from receiving gifts or money from local officials and from serving as an officer of a political party.
• Allow commissioners to support ballot measures related to the PEC, to appoint someone to fill a vacant PEC seat, to allow the city council or the PEC to remove a commissioner after providing notice of a hearing, allow commissioners to serve for up to one year past the end of their term if no one has been appointed to fill the seat.
• Require the PEC to set the city attorney’s and city auditor’s salary every two years.
• Prohibit lobbyists from making direct payments of more than $50 per year to local elected officials, candidates or their families.
